Realism: rational or reasonable?

Realism has maintained its central role in International Relations theory throughout the post‐1945 era, but the relative clarity of the realism of Carr and Morgenthau has been lost by the addition of several variant forms of the structural realism of Kenneth Waltz; moreover, while some liberals may have tempered their criticisms of realism, constructivist scholars have taken their place as opponents of the doctrine. In the books under review, Samuel Barkin attempts to reconcile constructivism to classical realism, while Charles Glaser has produced the most sophisticated account of structural realism since that of Waltz. Both books are well‐reasoned and stimulating, but as yet constructivist realism has produced no substantive findings, while Glaser's account of states as rational egoists cannot underpin an account of the national interest which is sensitive to the reasonable interests of others.     

Perspectivism: 'Type' or 'bomb'?

In this editorial Bruno Latour reviews a debate on 'Perspectivism and animism' between Philippe Descola (College of France) and Eduardo Viveiros de Castro (National Museum of Rio de Janeiro), that took place at Maison Suger, Institute of Advanced Studies, Paris on 30 January 2009.     

TIBETAN CULTURE:Extinct or Developing?

The 14th Dalai Lamarecently deliveredan interestingspeech to the Euro-pean Parliament. And anexamination of speeches hehas made over the past 40years show he has"grown up"with regard to how to exploithis wisdom under the cloak ofthe kasaya(religious gar-ment).His actions, however,belie that he is more than     

Nationalism and revolution: friends or foes?

Nationalism and revolution have generally been held to go together. Many nation‐states have had their origins in revolution, from the Americans in the 18th century to a host of Third World nation‐states in the 20th century. Generally, both modern revolutions and modern nationalism have the same origins, in 18th century Enlightenment thought. But this paper argues that, despite this common origin, the principles of revolution and nationalism are divergent, and can set one against the other. Revolutions emphasise freedom and equality; nationalism emphasises integration and unification. These principles can clash, though not inevitably and not always. The paper examines the 1789 French Revolution, the 1848 revolutions and the 1917 Russian revolution. It shows that in the first two cases, revolutionary aspirations came up against and were eventually displaced by nationalist aims. In the case of 1917, revolution paradoxically, and unintentionally, institutionalised nationalism. These examples show that, though linked at some high level of modern thought, revolution and nationalism express different and at times divergent strands of modernity.